No Canon stuff bought for Christmas but sold one of my 7Dc. Plan to replace it in the next two weeks with a 7D2. Hoped to see some sort of a slight holiday deal on it by then or will go for the regular price.

Anyone who considers himself (/herself) a photographer, should only buy 2.8 or faster. You can easily spot the amateurs carrying the F4s around.

Agree. But between the higher cost and carrying around all that extra weight I don't know if I would purchase the Canon 600mm f/2.8L IS L or just stick with the f/4 version and look like an amateur. Oh but ...

<snip>Regardless, so you know someone who bought a bunch of Nikon gear? A colleague of mine recently bought a 5DIII and four L-series lenses, over $10,000 if gear. So what? Both are completely anecdotal and as irrelevant as this thread you've posted...twice.

Dilbert,Over two years ago my wife bought me what she called a "Landscape Kit" for one of those x0 birthdays. 5D3 w/ the 24-105 kit lens, the 24 TSE and the 17-40 zoom. What does that prove? Just that for a reason, some people can spend a bit on new camera equipment if they see a reason to do so. As Neuro said "completely anecdotal and as irrelevant..." to this thread.

The only thing that differentiates Art Morris from a million other photographers is opportunity - he has access (by his own admission) yo lots of tame birds, and the time to exploit them.

I live in Florida just like Artie but on the East (Space Coast) coast and shoot a lot at Viera and MINWR. Unlike Artie who lives in the center of the state and goes over to the West coast for a lot of his local shooting. And therefore have access to the same tame birds that he does. But my work does not look like his

you slowly start buying gear and one day your gear is more expensive than your first car.

…and then one day, you buy a single lens that is more expsnsive than your first car.

My 5D III cost the same (number of dollars) as my first car. The camera $3500, the new 1964 Pontiac GTO convert. w/ 4 speed, tri-power, posi rear axle, power steering & brakes and lots of small add-on things was around $3475.

Just thinking what the 500 f/4L at about $6200 would have bought back then.

<SNIP>In fact, if you want to really pick nits, consider that an SLR stands for Single Lens Reflex. The fact that it is a Single Lens camera must mean that it should be set apart from what? Multi Lens cameras? I'm guessing yes, since there were cameras made way back that did indeed have multiple lenses, esp movie cameras. So the Single Lens part has been somewhat redundant for even longer, correct?

There were TLRs, Twin Lens Reflexes, like many of the Rolleiflex and Yashicamat cameras.

It will give you the "less distortion than an ultra-wide" that many prefer, after all is a 24mm equivalent at 15mm. If you shoot panos, zooming to the 35-50mm range will give you the 55-80mm look that gives a cleaner merge than wide angle lenses usually do. And it's a good walkaround lens.

I was out shooting with a friend (landscape & bird pro) last week and he is very close to adding the a7R "and a couple of lenses" to his 5D3, 24mm TSE, 40mm TSE, 17-40+ landscape kit. Will keep all the Canon lenses & bodies he has.